BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Answers

Advertising

With the new advertising, BP's threshold for accepting online criticism seems to have gone way down.

I wrote a piece yesterday calling all their new advertisers "somewhat" and accused some of them as multiple outfits doing business under the same parent company. I also pointed out that all these new pop-up or online advertisers seemed to have one goal in mind: To solicit money from B.P. members for a lot of get rich quick schemes and multitude of contests and vendors that we've never even heard of until now.

Interestingly, rather than responding to what I said, the posting was removed. We call that "censorship", which I thought was reserved for profanity here, rather than thoughts or editorial comments.

Google, that sponsors the ads, clearly makes no bones about engaging in an aggressive campaign that says:

"Google AdWords is a robust advertising program that connects your ads with customers on this site and across the web. Use AdWords to target your ads to this specific site or based on keywords of your choice."

This shotgun approach is one of the shoddiest forms of marketing there is. And I thought that BP was beyond such practices. Apparently, not if it generates revenue.

I thought as a family oriented site, any kid with access to a credit card is likely to spend on sites promising things that are essentially like get rich quick schemes and huckster marketing. It was merely criticism directed at BP and Jim Miotke for allowing advertisers without fully checking them out, including what H.P. was offering and the truthfulness of their representations. I guess they want it both ways. It's a family site as long as they can target kids in the marketing scheme.

Why don't we see high caliber companies like B&H, Calumet, or other well-known firms including suppliers, equipment manufacturers or labs, other than H.P. And at this point I don't think H.P. deliberately chose B.P as a site to advertise on. But then, what do I know.

So instead of deleting these comments, how bout if Jim responds to them. Does he really think bombarding all the members here, including the kids, with pop-ups and banners and all sorts of quick-link ads is a good thing...except for the revenue they generate for BP?
Take it light.
Mark

To love this question, log in above
March 19, 2007

To love this comment, log in above
March 19, 2007

Debby Tabb

PS what ever keeps the site going for all those who enjoy it- thats my vote!

To love this comment, log in above
March 19, 2007

A few months ago a supposedly traditional stock site I was associated with began placing ads on their site. Would you believe the ads targeted customers looking for photography and guess what kind of ads they were...microstock LOL. I thought that was the stupidest thing I ever saw the owner of a site do that was trying to promote more expensive photography sales.

To love this comment, log in above
March 19, 2007

I happen to love this site. I’ve taken six BP classes and feel that I have more than gotten my money’s worth for each class. I have great respect for the crew who work hard to make this site one of the best. However, if we are going to help one another avoid the many online scams that go around and that take advantage of youth, inexperience and naivety, it is somewhat disconcerting that my favorite online “home” would provide links to those type sites. And yes, I do appreciate the fact that operating this site is expensive and that because BP contracts with a third party to operate the site that they may have little control over the type ads that are displayed on their pages. At the same time, perhaps Jim and others need to take a second look at what is being done on their site. I rarely appreciate, but do accept the necessity for ads. However, ads that connect you to dubious ventures should be restricted from this otherwise terrific site.

To love this comment, log in above
March 19, 2007

For example, look at the 100's and 100's of complaints filed over the Endless Journeys scams, the "International Library of Photography" scams. And look at the ever expanding e-mails telling people how much someone in some foreign country loves their work and wants to send them something they can return the change for once they disclose their bank accounts, etc. scam. Gotta love that one. Ever wonder why they solicit people they can see aren't professional photographers.

I don't deny advertising has a place, a reasonable time, place AND manner. I've done a lot of advertising photography over the years. There are reputable advertisers, for example like B&H and Calumet and KEH.com that don't lower themselves to practices like misrepresentation, false promises, fraudulent marketing practices like bait and switch, etc. It is, however, unfortunate that people would justify the over simplification that like advertising exists to support a business, really suggests a a misunderstanding of the ethics and values of reputable advertising and the stuff I think we're complaining about, ain't reputable by a long shot.

I'm NOT advocating that BP remove all advertisers, but take steps instead, to somehow ensure that the people who DO advertise on this site through Google or any other source, are legitimate companies, offering legitimate business opportunities. I think at a minimum, they owe their BP subscribers that.

That's what I'm objecting to. Empty promises, advertsing that promotes false hopes for people, misleads them, scams them for any reason, and advertising that from firms that exist strictly and soley for the purpose of getting people to part with their money, foolishly or not, is simply wrong and certainly doesn't belong on a site of this caliber.

And btw, it appears that BP initially removed my posts but when I squawked, it seems they miraculously reappeared. Glad I had today off. LOL !!!
Take it light ;>)
And absolutely, Irene and I, among others, are really unified on this one.
Mark

To love this comment, log in above
March 19, 2007

Personaly I am not naive at all, but instead beleive that we as consumers have to take the steps to invetagate what works for us.
No one makes us click on those links.
And I have two teenage Boys who have used my credit car for PS games ect.
But I have taught them to read carefully and then I am in MY place with them to place any orders.
It is my soul responcibilty to teach them to beware of scams, to read and NOT to click on just any link.
Not the responcibilty of others to protect me and my kids.
I beleive it is very expensive and time consuming to run a site such as this.
and It does belong to the Better Photo creator and staff, to chose how to best pay the bills.
I don't beleive any of us have the right to put in two cents where we don't carry the burden of responcibility.
and I don't beleive your thread was discontinued - Sam had seen it.
Couldn't it be that instead of jumping to malious conclusions you might have JUST missed the fact that it was still there.
I mean really no one is perfect are they Mark?

Just MY opinion,
debby

To love this comment, log in above
March 19, 2007

To love this comment, log in above
March 19, 2007